Eight years after it was first filed, the biggest legal challenge in history to the state's system of funding public schools will finally play out before Colorado Supreme Court justices Thursday.

The case, Lobato vs. State of Colorado, was filed in 2005 by a group of parents from around the state and school districts from the San Luis Valley. The suit alleges the state's current school-funding system fails to provide a "thorough and uniform" system of education as outlined in the Colorado Constitution.

Plaintiffs in the suit, as well as the state, represented by Attorney General John Suthers' office, will present oral arguments in the case in the ornate chambers of the newly opened and stately Colorado Supreme Court building in downtown Denver.

"This case is about our kids and Colorado's future," said Kathy Gebhardt, a lead attorney for the plaintiffs. "Fifty years from now, our kids will face unimaginable global challenges, and they will be armed only with the education that we provide today."

Through a spokeswoman, Suthers declined comment.

Denver District Judge Sheila Rappaport in 2011 agreed with plaintiffs in the case that the way the state funds schools does not meet the requirement of a "thorough and uniform" system.

Lawyers for the state have argued that the question of how much should be spent on education is not one for the courts and should be left to the legislature and voters. The state also argues more money alone does not necessarily create better schools.

Advertisement

Suthers' office contends Rappaport erred by excluding evidence that the state, in its funding of education, must weigh a variety of constitutional mandates, including TABOR, which limits state spending and requires a vote of the people for tax hikes; Amendment 23, which mandates higher spending every year on schools; and the Gallagher Amendment, which has shifted the bulk of the burden for funding schools away from local districts and to the state.

One of the biggest questions about Thursday's oral arguments is whether Justice Monica Marquez, who prior to being appointed to the court served as a deputy attorney general to Suthers and worked on the state's defense in the case, will recuse herself.

Colorado Supreme Court officials say there is no way to know if Marquez will withdraw from the case until Thursday morning, when she either shows up in the courtroom or doesn't.

If Marquez does recuse herself, that creates the possibility of a 3-3 split on the court, which would mean Rappaport's ruling would stand.

Plaintiffs in the case, who represented students and school districts across the state, have not sought a certain sum of money to fix the problem. However, they have pointed to studies showing the state needs up to $4 billion more to provide an adequate education.

The state now spends more than 39.8 percent, or $3 billion in the 2012-13 fiscal year that ends in June, of its $7.5 billion general fund on K-12 schools.

Justices will make no decision Thursday and are not expected to rule until months later.

Article Comments

We reserve the right to remove any comment that violates our ground rules, is spammy, NSFW, defamatory, rude, reckless to the community, etc.

We expect everyone to be respectful of other commenters. It's fine to have differences of opinion, but there's no need to act like a jerk.

Use your own words (don't copy and paste from elsewhere), be honest and don't pretend to be someone (or something) you're not.

Our commenting section is self-policing, so if you see a comment that violates our ground rules, flag it (mouse over to the far right of the commenter's name until you see the flag symbol and click that), then we'll review it.